Projects lack structure because of the values of project contributors.

As the four project types show, many projects make do without a defined project structure. This applies to *collectives* and *embedded projects*, but to a lesser degree can also influence work in *organizations*. The lack of structure is intentional and follows logically from the uniform path that leads people into open-source infrastructure projects: for the people who make it in the FOSS field, individual motivation and agency are core values. Our interviewees often saw the presence of governance structures as limiting their opportunities for action, decision-making and personal development.


  • Projects that see themselves as a community (as opposed to an organization working with a community) value self-organization. Management and structure are treated with skepticism, even more so if they are implemented by external influences, such as a funder.
  • Self-organization sets open-source infrastructure projects apart from companies that work in a similar field. Even if they share goals or work on the same products, the work culture is very different.
  • Non-open-source organizations are likely to expect at least a basic structure and inner cohesiveness, especially when deliberating collaboration. Many open-source projects cannot deliver on this point – which stands in the way of more effective networking.
  • Members of the community are affected differently by the lack of structure. While this can open up opportunities for taking greater responsibility, it can also lead to people feeling lost and, in the long run, dropping out.


“Our [community] rules are very developer-centric.”

“We have companies working with us – they need a contact person.”

Related Recommendations

All Recommendations arrow_forward